Spacecowboy96
Nov 3 2004, 04:26 AM
I was wondering if anyone had any idea if adding a K&N air filter improves HP or is this just a leading claim that some advertise?
Tyler
Nov 3 2004, 04:57 AM
The it's just a replacement filter it wont make much differance. You need the FIPK to get some noticable hp. The main benefit is it is reusable.
birdman8850
Nov 3 2004, 05:30 AM
im sure u get some hp but not a drastic change but everybit helps right but at the same time it lets more air in so from people i talk to they say more air more dirt they claim its how more air gets in by not grabbing as much dirt as other filters but i still use 1 and have no problems so i guess what i comes down to is what do u beleive and does it really make that much of a differnce in lloong run
KRockLS1
Nov 3 2004, 05:30 AM
ya, you might see like 1-5 HP under varying conditions, but generally you can't count it as a mod.
Doug
Nov 3 2004, 02:52 PM
If it is the stock LT1 filter I have one you can have it. send me our address and 5 bucks for shipping and you can get a recharger kit at any parts store to re oil it. It was in my car before i went to ram air. it is just sitting around. I have the entire stock intake plumbing but the bellows has a tear in it. I have the air box that the K&N is in the tube that runs up to the bellows.
Let me know,
as for HP 5HP max but it is the last filter you will ever buy!
Doug
Chad97WS.6
Nov 3 2004, 07:45 PM
It's probably more or a mental thing, but when I put the K&N in my ram air car, it felt like it pulled harder. Just a SOTP feeling, no dyno, but the rear tires felt like they burned a little easier. Once they were replaced (3 days after the filter change-over), I really couldn't tell a difference. My thought on it is, many small improvements can add up to big HP gains over time.
WS6Freak
Nov 4 2004, 06:54 AM
I think the K&N helps on hi-end power. When the engine really needs more air, over 4,500 rpm it helps. For driving normally I think the improvement is marginal, it depends on what other mods you already have.
When I changed to the Volant CAI I have not noticed any improvement (I had the K&N with lid before) on the low end. I want to believe I "feel" a difference at WOT all the way up to 6,000 rpm but it's hard to tell.
What I really like is the Shaner S3 TB - awesome for daily driving, more right-foot-response because of the 98 style TB offset cam.
95bossf
Dec 1 2004, 07:33 PM
it helps with better filtration of air, 1-5hp(depending on conditions and mods,every bit helps) its reusable and for the price-if you change the airfilter everytime the owners manual says to then it pays for itself. its not really a mod since you really didnt modify anything just change of brand but most ppl include it in there mod list i think cause after you buy it and use up 5 whole min to install you did it yourself and feel good. plus it comes with a nice sticker that adds an extra 10 bragging hp.
the k/n c.a.i are one of the best and of course thats where the most noticeable power is at form all the c.a.i out there. for the lt1 k/n and moroso have the proven to make at least 10-12 hp. on a 03 cobra a k/n c.a.i will make the most out of all the c.a.i out there giving it 26hp and 11lbtq. sound like a lot for a c.a.i but iv seen it plus the 03 has a blower so it gets more, able to use it better.
SiberianFirestorm
Dec 2 2004, 05:44 AM
When I first got my car, I was testing it to see what it could do. I wanted to know what was the highest gear I could go in to idle and roll with traffic. I could not go into 6th under 55mph. After I put the FIPK (mind the exhaust did nto seem to be stock and this was before my Borla) i could go into 6th and idle at about 35mph.
I also noticed a slight increase in throttle response because air flowed easier through the filter.
As for what kind of gain out a jsut a filter, 5 hp seems to be about it. There are things you can smooth and clean to maybe get an additional 1 or 2, but the CAI kits are much better for performance.
Matt
Minijaka
Jun 9 2005, 02:03 AM
Sorry for bumping such an old post. But I think this is related to the link which I taken notice recently which I found very interesting.
http://home.usadatanet.net/~jbplock/ISO5011/SPICER.htmBased on the statics and stuff, I believe what the tests shown was that even though K&N does flow very well, but it seem to do so because the filter is very loose on actually filtering. I'm not sure how much engines likes those extra dirt. To me it seems like if you don't mind the dirt, just take off the filter, no restriction.

I remember reading somewhere that having clean air is pretty important, and one type of intake/filter combo is go big intake with very restrictive air filter. This way gives you the amount of air the engine will want, but keeping the air very clean.
As far as modifications go, I believe the researcher on the link got it for air filters
QUOTE
The stock filter will flow MORE THAN ENOUGH AIR to give you ALL THE HORSEPOWER the engine has to give.
He also mentions that unless your car is super modified, there is no need for that much availble air. It is like getting a 100mm throttle body on a otherwise stock engine, what is the point? And if your engine is super modified, couldn't you spare a few extra bucks to get a custom bigger intake with restrictive filter to keep the air going yet staying clean?
There were a lot of static stuff and I'm not the best at reading, so if you find anything interesting feel free to point that out.
Jazsun
Jun 9 2005, 03:21 AM
Thats just one guys word. You cant belive everything you read.
KRockLS1
Jun 9 2005, 03:50 AM
from what i've seen and heard, just putting the filter on won't change the air flow much. But if you add some kind of cold air system, doesn't really matter what kind...air lid, FIPK, etc. your flow will increase and performance will result.
Minijaka
Jun 9 2005, 04:35 AM
Well I know it is just one man's words. It is just something to concider. Remember that you cannot trust advertisements either.
As for increasing flow; there is no doubt altering your intake will change the flow. And more air availble is good (if your engine will use it, which unmodified engine probably don't need). But the thing to keep in mind is that with that increased flow, is there also increased amount of dirt that gets into your engine?
Assuming that his test are correct; then the difference between AC DELCO and K&N is that AC DELCO lets air through slower, but much cleaner air, where K&N just lets everything pass through basically. Following that, and just assume K&N flows 5x better than AC DELCO: Wouldn't having a AC DELCO 5 times the size of a K&N Flow just as well but with cleaner air? If that is true, disregarding size issues, wouldn't having the AC DELCO be better than having K&N?
Not bashing any companies, just something to think about.
SiberianFirestorm
Jun 9 2005, 05:37 AM
From what I have witnessed is that the K&N actually works better when dirty. It does allow a lot more air to flow through. Yes, when it is jsut cleaned it lets some dirt in. That is why you do not need to clean it that often. A dirty K&N will trap more dirt and still allow more air to flow than a stock paper filter.
Just my $.02
Matt
Minijaka
Jun 9 2005, 06:53 AM
QUOTE
From what I have witnessed is that the K&N actually works better when dirty.
This is true, as shown in the charts. The dust loading curves shows how much dust is caught inside the filter.
For this chart, the filters were exposed to a constant stream of dirt.
As you can see, at first the K&N loads slowly, meaning much of the dirt get's past the filter. But right before the dust delivered amount to 200, you can see the K&N load level increased rapidly, meaning it has became more restrictive, thus catching and holding more dirt.
So yes, the K&N does work better dirty than cleaned.
KRockLS1
Jun 9 2005, 07:40 AM
It's also important to realize that, while it's always better to have cleaner air. The K&N generally keeps out anything big enough to actually damage the engine. Making an analogy like having a K&N is like having no cleaner at all, simply isn't true at all. It seems obvious to me that there would be a direct correlation between restriction and cleanliness of air. I dont see how it would be possible to increase flow without also increasing dirt particles in that flow. Air, by definition has particles in it. A larger flow of air will certainly have more particles. The only away around this is to avoid dusty/polluted areas or drive in a sterile environment.
Minijaka
Jun 9 2005, 08:59 AM
I probably came across wrong. I did not mean that K&N is the same as no filter. What I meant was conciderably more dirt gets through the K&N in comparison to some other filters. Having some form of a filter is always good.
However, now that you mention more air = more dirt, I'd have to think about that... I keep thinking about just getting a bigger restrictive filter, but then it just doesn't seem to be easy...
Shaun Barcelow
Jun 9 2005, 01:40 PM
To make the comparisons in that study useful, the results should be compared to a condition of no filtration. I realize that wouldn't work for all of the tests conducted, but to give a sense of scale to measurements of flow restriction, parts per million passing, etc., the condition of no filtration should be represented graphically. What looks like a large difference between the best and the worst may look minuscule when placed in the appropriate perspective. I've got K&N filter elements in all three of my cars. I had one in my Sonoma for most of its 185K miles before I sold it. It never burned a drop of oil, so the result of additional particles passing could not have been too detrimental. Good stuff, though. I like to see raw data like that. Just my two cents...
KRockLS1
Jun 10 2005, 02:43 AM
QUOTE(Shaun Barcelow @ Jun 9 2005, 05:40 AM)
To make the comparisons in that study useful, the results should be compared to a condition of no filtration. I realize that wouldn't work for all of the tests conducted, but to give a sense of scale to measurements of flow restriction, parts per million passing, etc., the condition of no filtration should be represented graphically. What looks like a large difference between the best and the worst may look minuscule when placed in the appropriate perspective. I've got K&N filter elements in all three of my cars. I had one in my Sonoma for most of its 185K miles before I sold it. It never burned a drop of oil, so the result of additional particles passing could not have been too detrimental. Good stuff, though. I like to see raw data like that. Just my two cents...
good idea, but i dont think that it would be possible to have a 'control' test without a filter, because I think the machine that they used to run the tests uses the filter element itself to collect data....i could be wrong though.
Shaun Barcelow
Jun 10 2005, 04:01 PM
QUOTE(KRockLS1 @ Jun 9 2005, 10:43 PM)
...because I think the machine that they used to run the tests uses the filter element itself to collect data...
IF that's true, then I would submit that the study isn't very scientific. You can't scientifically, impartially observe something that has been made into a measurement device. (Please bear in mind that I said "IF" above.) It has been argued that the act of observing alone changes the results of the observation but, for the purposes of this study, I would expect some sort of downstream data collection. You may be right, however. I only scimmed the test description.
SiberianFirestorm
Jun 10 2005, 04:46 PM
I found this in the test page.
QUOTE
Dirt passing through the filter is captured in the Test Station’s Post Filter. The exact amount of dirt passed is determined by measuring the before and after weight of the Post Filter.
It seems to me that the K&N has a lower flow resistance. Mind you that is a clean filter. What is odd to me is that the test was not a total control setup. The humidity will affect how well each one will work and it varies 10% through all of the filters. It all comes down to the one simple fact, it is the choice of each person to use what they desire to use.
Matt
bluefire
Jul 14 2008, 10:07 PM
i was looking into getting some K&N action in my car, but now im scared, lol.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please
click here.